| | Comments (1)
"Felix: I dont know why everybody's being so fucking stupid!" (Miller 100).

I find this quote particularly ironic because Felix seems to be the one in this scene who is being stubborn. The whole idea about crucifying "charley" seems to have its pros and cons. Yet Felix is only seeing the Money that would come to the government from advertising. He is not seeing the other side that maybe people would not take to kindly to the second murder of Jesus. But "charley" actually wants to be crucified for the people much like Jesus knew he HAD to be crucified to forgive the sins of all people, yet "Charley" chooses not too. Why is that? 

The whole idea that Felix isnt sure about all stems (obviously...) from materialism which is something quite different than the society during biblical times. Im not sure that the primary focus during the time of Jesus was on wealth and materialism as miller seems show is the focus in the play. Right after Felix makes this statement Stanley goes on to talk about the property values and all the merchandise that would follow if the crucification actually happened. I think that perhaps "Charley" saw that society was too wrapped up in money and wealth instead of focusing on living life and being righteous and just to each other. Since the people didnt really need the hero, they need the materialistic things that would follow the death of the "hero," he chose not to come down.

However there is another side to the argument. One could probably argue that wealth and more specifically the power associated with it played a major factor in the biblical crucifixion of Jesus. Jesus knew what was going to happen and he knew that it had to happen. I think he eve told Judas that he must betray him? Im not really that up to speed on my sunday school knowledge so if anyone has another opinion on this that wold be great. Why do you think that "Charley" decide not to come down in the end? And how does that relate to the biblical crucifixion of Jesus?


Rebecca Marrie said:

I was very intrigued on your thoughts as to to why Charlie chose to not be crucified although he was obviously meant to represent Christ, who knowingly chose to be crucified. I completely agree with your theory that "since the people didn't really need a hero, they just needed the material things that would follow the death of a hero, he chose not to come down." However, I would take that one step further and say that in a way, though different than Jesus, he DID save the people. By giving into crucifixion, Charlie would have not saved his people, but rather enabled them to live even more sinful lives. His death would not have "opened the gates of Heaven," as that had already been done by someone long before his time. Rather, I would venture to say that he would have opened the gates of hell a little wider. His death would have caused mass ruckus throughout the country, and all for the sake of money. Not love, as Jesus had, but simply money.

Leave a comment

Type the characters you see in the picture above.